This album is literally a meme. It's a joke. Nobody actually likes it. People only pretend to like a 2 hour long high pitched beep because they think it's funny that somebody would really listen to it. I've yet to see anyone write something serious about this so-called music, that doesn't describe it as a joke or boring.

thumbs up if you're one of the ones who listens to real music like Led Zeppelin and the Beatles

really though what i don't understand is how these albums have so many people taking part. most of the top onkyo artists on last.fm are groups of 3 or 4 people. what do the other guys do while the one guy messes about with a tone generator?

Noise isnt music. It is a niche market and a badge of social status. It is not composed, it lacks rhythm, melody, and time. It is cacaphony for the sake of itself.If you like the 'atmosphere', good for you, but that doesnt make it music.

>all music is composed by having it first written in notation on paper

wrong

when merzbow makes music, he's still prepared something. he has noise generating devices and he knows how they sound beforehand; when he records some noise he knows how the different noises coming from them will sound together. he doesn't just hit record and then mess about with a DAW and hope it will sound like harsh noise. it's composed, not in the strictest sense of the term "musical composition", but in the sense that he's planned it beforehand. there's some element of composition

I can't speak about rhythm but any sound and any timbre can be classified as melodic. In any way, melody and rhythm aren't the point behind improvised music, which is sound - an abstract kind of melody.

>>520127111. Its still not music2. I agree but only when you understand and comply with music theory3. Not true. Wankery like onkyo is not tantamount to the works of Bach. Stop truing to corrupt peoples minds with this circular logic.

>>52012819>I agree but only when you understand and comply with music theorymany improvising musicians developed their skills in academia. many did not. you'd be hard pressed to determine which did and which didn't through sound alone let alone disparage some for not being formally trained. sensitive understanding of music does not require a background in music theory or a strict adherence to it while performing.

>wankery like onkyoit's pretty obvious how little you've listened to when you only list onkyo when talking about modern improvised music. you can't defend your opinions as objective fact by deferring to vague notions of music theory and 'corruption'.

Music theory comes, almost always, AFTER the music. In some cases it comes before, and that's where the real wankery starts (I'm looking at you, Hindemuth, Schoenberg).

Noise is MAINSTREAM music, has been since musique concrete. Pauline Oliveros used to have people sit and listen to fluorescent lights and refrigerators, and she's generally considered one of the more important composers of the 70s.

Music is organized sound, that's all. "Organized" is a very loose term that can encompass random chance.

>>52011690the pseudo-intellectual reviews on RYM turned me away at first. simply, it's meditative. like a lot of lowercase and indeterminacy, it's very relaxing music. even still, it's not for everyone.

>this sine waves signifies the lack of reality. low frequencies signifies loss of importance of the self. if you believe communism capitalism god etc or if you are living to get a new car or for the tv show you gonna watch tomorrow dont listen to this record. you cant appereciate this recording or you gonna just pretend due to its popularity.

>>52013404Don't worry, someone will start shitposting in a minute, blaming dadaism for "lelel so randum" teenagers in a second. Completely missing the fact that it was one of the most interesting social reactions to a world war.

>>52013574nigga that's like saying any one particular language destroys the creative process. The concept of representing sounds symbolically is not flawed, but the name of the game is to move away from assuming that music is written solely in 12 tones.

>>52013574>The standardization of written music is honestly the worst single innovation in music history.I don't understand why people have such a hard time transcending the "music = notation" thing in the age of electronics and recorded music. I mean it should be so intuitively obvious...

Notation is a convenience that facilitates transmission and analysis, but it's not the very definition of music itself. Its scope is very, very limited and specific.

>>52013708>Sound has to be one of the most trivially representable physical phenomena.It absolutely isn't. You really can't describe timbre beyond the most vague and superficial qualities. Look spectromorphology and how elaborate it is. It's extremely limited itself.

>>52013984That's why this word is stupid when used for music, it has no real meaning in music. What is a chaotic sound ? A sound who isn't a musical note or who isn't harmonic ? Muh Westerner egocentrism A sound who doesn't seem pleasent to your ear ? But what if another person find it pleasant ?

Using the word "noise" for describing music is as stupid as using the term "onkyo" describe all this scene of music

>>52013817Sine waves really aren't the best way to describe sounds. It's just one type of analysis that isn't really suitable for all sounds, or necessarily relevant to either perception or meaningful description.

>>52014177Isn't there an actual definition for noise though? Like a point where the overtones overpower the actual note so the fundamental becomes uncertain. So you can "measure" noise in a scientific way.

>>52014275>Like a point where the overtones overpower the actual note so the fundamental becomes uncertain.Indeterminate pitch doesn't mean noise. The term "noise" itself isn't that descriptive or useful, and anyway it doesn't generally describe what noise music actually sounds like.

Look, the post-modernist take on "noise" (beauty is in the ear of the behearer) is a solid 20th century footing, but it is still a plebeian argument at its base.

Music is inherently subjective, but certain things exist in nature, including chaos, binary simplicity, and the harmonic series. Certain things exist inherent to humanity, including the limits of our memory, the range of sounds we can hear, and the fact that this range centers around our vocal range. Our heartbeats and footsteps tend to fall within certain bpm ranges.

If you wipe the slate clean, you have to fill it with something, and nature is a great place to start.

>>52014572But music is already intuitively based on things that are perceptually relevant. Outside of a few 20th century things (Xenakis, etc.), music has never been a wholly contrived and artificial construct. Any noise performer is using perception to inform their actions, and thus implicitly takes these things into account.

>>52014196perception and description are secondary to reproduction, as the former two are subjective but the latter isn't. Your perception of the same sound can vary each time you hear it, but if its waveform is the same, that alone should give insights about how to allow you to perceive it multiple times.

>>52014572That's kinda what The Art of Noises was getting at, how natural and industrial sounds and bodily noises could be used to make music. It wasn't completely abstract, it was just based on a different set of principles and types of sounds than Western music at the time.

>>52014644>music has never been a wholly contrived and artificial construct

No, the situation has been even worse for long periods of musical history. Serialism, with the intention of "freeing dissonance", went down such a dark, abstract alleyway that it destroyed western art music for 30 years.

This is the problem with serialism, concisely stated:

Our 12tet tuning system has no precedent in nature, it's an approximation that allows for certain stylistic features of the baroque, namely "modulation". Before this, tonality was a much broader area because the tones in just intonation vibrate in actual pure ratios. In 12tet- everything classical you've ever heard and most of today's music- these pure ratios are fudged so that you can play "the same thing" in every key.

Serialism took 12tet as a natural fact, which it is not, and then imposed a set of algorithms on it in order to try to reach some kind of complete art.

>>52014788>still, it's some representation that allows for reproducibilityIt's not really an improvement on just recording a time series, i.e. PCM. It's more useful for either analysis or modification.

>which is the end-goal of writing music down, no?The advantage of a score has more to do with performance or formal analysis.

>>52014791>Serialism, with the intention of "freeing dissonance", went down such a dark, abstract alleyway that it destroyed western art music for 30 years. There's nothing really wrong with dissonance, and the contributions of serialism to music theory were great. At worst, you learn something about music cognition, i.e. that highly chromatic melodies with many large intervals tend to be difficult to follow and not very memorable.

>Our 12tet tuning system has no precedent in natureThere's a problem here. You're assuming that things must be derived "from nature" to be somehow valid. But we acclimate to things we're familiar with. Jazz sounds perfectly acceptable despite having dissonant tritones all over the place (the ratio is sqrt(2) which is objectively extremely dissonant). People who aren't familiar with just intonation often prefer tempered thirds (which are off by ~15 cents) over just thirds. Culture is just as big a factor.

>Before this, tonality was a much broader area because the tones in just intonation vibrate in actual pure ratios.That's really way too much of oversimplification. It's not like everyone was Harry Partch and then Bach comes along and BAM everything's 12 equal.

>>52014984>Culture is just as big a factor.>>52014984>But we acclimate to things we're familiar with

Yes, this is the post-modernist argument. Again, I think that this is a fine footing to understand a lot of things, but we can do better.

The even bigger factor than culture is instrument design. And now, we've reached the end game of synthesis and reproduction, to where we can easily make things freed from the constraints of humans, tuning systems, and anything else that has previously defined genre.

Yes, but it's essentially true. Tonality developed from monody: gradually from the low ratios, until there were three notes, then five, then seven, then twelve… and then we magically stopped. But 19, 31, 49tet are there, they sound great.

I'm a composer, I've worked in notation, in various non 12tet tuning systems. So I'm coming from a foundation of "why not?"

>>52010921This album is the most boring thing I've sat down and listened to. It's interesting though in the way that it presents unpleasant and monotone sounds I don't usually hear juxtaposed with silence. I can't fault anyone for enjoying this, however if someone were to come up to me and told me this was their favorite album I'd think they were a pretentious douche who was lying. It's interesting, that's really all.

>>52015144>Yes, this is the post-modernist argument. Again, I think that this is a fine footing to understand a lot of things, but we can do better. My point was more that you can't really propose an entirely novel system that doesn't take into account any cultural or historical factors and expect anyone to understand, appreciate or adopt it. That would just be a repeat of the same mistake that modernism made. Anything new needs to come from a firm basis in perception and music cognition, and it needs to be introduced in a way that allows people to adapt to it gradually.

>and then we magically stopped.Because continuing was historically too unwieldy, given the difficulties of notation, instrument building and performance. It's not as though no one tried.

Any noise can be music if the artist calls it that, but it can still be shit music to almost anyone that hears it. If you take an apple and grind it in a blender, then suck all the moisture out of it until it's a powder, then rinse every bit of flavor and color out of it, I guess genetically that pile of dust is still an apple, but almost nobody is going to like the taste of it or the sight of it or anything.

Then again, appealing to the masses isn't the only thing that music is about, but it definitely plays a fairly large part.

>>52015443I'd just assume that they were lying to look more "patrician." I feel like the actual subset of people that think this album is their favorite and it genuinely is their favorite is in the single digits.

>>52015485there's a huge variety of music within the same genre that this album falls under. don't be so quick to knock a piece of music after one listen and little to no understanding of how it came to be.

I know a lot of people who consider it to be one of their favorites within the genre.

>>52015543>I know a lot of people who consider it to be one of their favorites within the genre.For good reason. It kind of distills the most important people and interesting qualities of the whole scene into one release. And to some extent it's a /mu/ meme but that doesn't really subtract from it. I felt the same way when I heard it circa 2005.

>>52015577I'd personally go with erstlive 005 for the same reasons you mentioned and it would serve to frustrate even more hapless /mu/ browsers with its length. It still amazes me how resistant people are to this music that we get threads like this so often.

>>52015713I don't see why the minor distinction is enough for you to call someone a pretentious douchebag. for many people who listen to this music it is their favorite genre, and therefore this can be someone's favorite album of all time. I happen to enjoy eai and onkyo more consistently than any other genre although this is not one of my favorites.

I'm not trying to defend the music - I'll enjoy it regardless. I just think you are being unnecessarily harsh for no reason other than "I don't like it that much so how can anyone else"

>>52015724I don't think people reacting to this album on /mu/ is vital to anything.

>>52015806You're reading into it wrong. I would assume if someone told me that this is their favorite album was latching onto the fact that it's the more popular of avant-garde music like this. That's because:a.) not many people listen to this type of musicb.) of the people that do listen to this type of music, it is only a subset of them that think it's their favorite of the genrec.) of the people that think this is their favorite of the genre it's probably very few that think this is their favorite album of all time, as you illustrate by liking something else.

If you examine that small amount of people, it is far more likely someone is claiming that this is their favorite album to impress other people or annoy them. I usually assume that someone presenting this album is doing that because it's much more likely. They usually are accompanied by an "all other music is inferior" attitude. It has absolutely nothing to do with how much I personally enjoy it.

>>52015713>why is this better than another similar album?Variety and range. Sachiko M and Toshimaru Nakamura on their own tend to be more monotonous and less interesting. I feel like Good Morning Good Night has more interesting content without compromising anything. The interplay between the sounds is what makes it nicer than the solo work.

>>52015615>or you know, just drop off a bunch of instruments to the localsIt would be better of DAWs, VSTs, etc. offered good support for this that wasn't a pain in the ass. As is, you can do it, but it's not really something you'll stumble into unintentionally.

>>52016015>It would be better of DAWs, VSTs, etc. offered good support for this that wasn't a pain in the ass

amen bro. I was trying to do electronic microtonality in the early 00s, it was fucking terrible. the academics hadn't figured out how to make instruments for kids yet… really, how hard is it to program a couple more scales into things? the virus had it, but most midi vst shit didn't.

now, ten years later, it's still like that. we need skrillex to start making just intonation music or something.

>>52016016Have you been on /mu/ or RYM lately? People care a lot about how anonymous people think about their music taste. If you ask most of them why they like this more than other albums most of them just parrot arguments already made by critics without actually providing any personal insight.

People who enjoy art music and avant garde music often are entitled and think their taste is superior. It's people who take the term "patrician" seriously. People like to have unaccessible taste because it looks cool. If they see someone saying that pleb music is on par with their favorite art album they get angry. I've seen it happen in real life.

>>52016018>Fair enough. But what about works not associated with these artists? Why is it better?The thing is, they're kind of the center of this style of super minimalist onkyo. There are plenty of other people doing minimal weird electronics, but it's usually not that stylistically similar. And if they're doing something comparable, it's usually derivative and not really as notable.

Sachiko M is easier to digest in an ensemble setting, by the way. Her other appearances on Otomo Yoshihide-affiliated records are more accessible.

>>52016172>If you ask most of them why they like this more than other albums most of them just parrot arguments already made by critics without actually providing any personal insight

it's painfully obvious who these people are on rym(only a few onkyo releases rated or whatever), and /mu/ is pretty terrible for real discussion. places like bagatellen(rip), ihatemusic, various blogs, etc give you a more accurate representation of the people who listen to this music more than just casually.

calling someone a pretentious douchebag for having this album as their favorite of all time is just fucking silly. if they can't articulate their opinion to you that is one thing, but presuming that they can't without asking is unfair.

>>52016243sachiko m isn't involved in this music at the moment and otomo yoshihide only tangentially.

>>52016155>the academics hadn't figured out how to make instruments for kids yet… That's not really what academics are supposed to do. Academics don't develop commercial music software anyway.

>really, how hard is it to program a couple more scales into things? the virus had it, but most midi vst shit didn't.The problem is really MIDI. 128 notes plus controller data is stupid if you want to play arbitrary pitches. And the VST standard is based on MIDI. You can scale the incoming pitch for equal temperaments, but then sometimes there aren't enough notes. You can use controller data to retune, or a tuning table within the instrument, but those are a pain in the ass. It kinda needs to be re-conceived from the ground up. Or just use Max or whatever instead.

>we need skrillex to start making just intonation music or something.I think there's actually a lot of potential for that sort of thing. The stuff I've heard so far isn't fantastic, and what I'm working on myself isn't necessarily that accessible, but it's the direction that things need to be moving in.

>>52013574Youre just too ignorant to understand it is all. Thats why you reject culture and history for pseudo avant horseshit spoon fed to anyone who feels edgy or rebellious enough to have their common sense clouded by mindless rebellionGet educated.

Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.